Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker

cchappa · Pair Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 50

My latest game to improve at is Stud Hi/Lo. In fact, it's the first ring game I actually play regularly (I much prefer SnG's and tourneys, which have definitive ends). I started out at .04/.08 (at PS) with $2.00, and leave when I've either busted out or doubled. So far, I have yet to bust out in 10 sessions. I know that this is most likely because if the (low) level of player at such a low limit and not completely dependant on my skills.

However, I do want to progress to higher limits. Since I am relatively new to regularly playing ring games, I have some questions. But first, here's what I want to do, a la Kristi Gazes's pro tip (#41). I'd like to crank out three winning sessions in a row at one level before advancing to the next, and stepping down a level if I ave three losing sessions in a row. My questions are:

1) In a game whose limits are X/2X, how much should I sit down with?

2) Speaking of sitting down, what percent of my bankroll should I(comfortably) sit down with at a table?

3) Finally, what exactly do you call a "winning session"? Surely, not just leaving while you are ahead. Leaving with twice what you sat down with? More? Less?

Thanks for your input.

flafishy · Three of a Kind Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 77

I don't like that advice at all for moving between levels, I don't care who it came from.

You have to be sure that you have enough of a bankroll that you would have little chance of losing it all. Most people will agree that it should be somewhere between 200x and 300x the big bet. So you should have somewhere between $200 and $300 to play .50/$1, or between $100 and $150 to play .25/.50, etc.

I personally use 300xBB as a minimum guideline, but I do pay some monthly bills out of my bankroll. If you're just working on building your bankroll and not planning on taking anything out of it, 200x would be fine.

As far as a buyin, I generally will sit down with between 20x and 30x, depending on how my game has been going and how much time I have to play.

cchappa · Pair Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 50

Thanks for the suggestions. I've reconsidered my "when to switch level" gimmick. But I still would like suggestions on what people consider a "winning session".

DevilfishFan · Royal Flush Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 906

Low limit players are terrible. You should be able to win just by playing the right hands and folding when you should be.

cchappa · Pair Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 50

That's what I was afraid of. I'm just hang around there for a while, try to notice things, slowly build a better bankroll, then move up when my bank says so.

DevilfishFan · Royal Flush Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 906

That's the smartest thing to do. Unfortunatly where I play they have $2.40 SNGs, and then $7.00 SNGs with nothing inbetween. I don't have the online roll to move up that high yet.

Ecliptica · Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:57 am Post subject:

It depends on how confident you are on your ability to play well at the higher levels. I used to play the 10/20 limit (sometimes I'd go up to 30/60 if I was in the gambling mood) at PokerStars and I usually bought-in for the minimum ($300 at 30/60). Everyone thinks I'm probably crazy, but I was confident enough in my ability to be able to play a pot and not go broke (minimum buy-in usually lets you play one big pot).

Unlike Hold 'Em and Omaha, you KNOW when you're beat with Seven Stud/8. I'm a tight player anyway and would only play hands where I know I could scoop the pot (A-2-3, 3-4-5, that type of stuff) and got away from it on fourth street if I hit a bad card. There's no point in chasing if you're going to get quartered - that's what the people at the .01/.02 haven't realized and why they're still playing .01/.02.

I considered it a winning session if I could double my buy-in, also. . .which usually meant one big win Smile

I guess I was sort of cheating in that aspect (if I buy in for $1,200 then doubling it gets significantly harder).

EDIT: I forgot to stress that even buying in for the minimum, you must have significantly more than that in your bankroll to be able to handle a beat if it comes. If I played the 30/60 at $300, I made sure to have at least $2,400 in my bankroll. I just don't like putting all my money on the table (Mike Caro's Tell #2 :p)

DevilfishFan · Royal Flush Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 906

You might get quartered in stud 8 once every 2 months if you played every day.

You don't always know when you're beat, but you do have more information than in hold 'em. Do you know you're beat when you have (A-A)5-k-k and the loosest player at the table is showing 3-5-7 with 4-6 in the hole? Of course not. You do a lot of guessing, but you can be a lot more sure your hand is good if you take notes on the types of hands people play. If the guy showing 3-5-7 plays any three cards he's dealt you can play aces up with little fear of being completely dominated in that scenario.

jbrennen · Straight Flush Joined: 16 Aug 2005 Posts: 422

Ecliptica · Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:43 pm Post subject:

I haven't read that essay, but now I'm quite interested. I'll try to find it next time I'm perusing around Borders.

As for the last point about it being psychological - I'd do that, too. Sometimes I'd go sit .04/.08 with $1000 just because "it looks cool" :p

AllInDrawinDead · Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject:

I think a winning session is one where you've won 10 big bets. For a .04/.08 game that's $0.80

You might be ready for the .05/.10 game. Also, when you move up and take a shot at a bigger game, you can always move back down. It's not a permanent decision. I don't think there's anything wrong with playing a game that you don't have the bankroll for if you have a goal for winnings in mind, and a threshold for max loss that you stick to. As long as a loss at those levels doesn't wipe you out.

mistaken69 · Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:02 am Post subject: Re:

AllInDrawinDead · Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:03 am Post subject: Re:

[quote="mistaken69I think a winning session is when you've left the table with more than you arrived with.[/quote]

I should not that I don't consider it a losing session when you only lost a little bit just like I don't consider it a winning session when you win only a little bit. Anything less then 3 bets either way is breaking even to me.

starlet311 · Three of a Kind Joined: 09 Feb 2006 Posts: 91

dannyboya · High Card Joined: 28 Nov 2006 Posts: 10

I agree with at least 300 big bets for your bankroll(preferably more for stud games, one more betting round). I always sit at a table with 25 big bets and if I get low I will refill. I like to have enough money to cover a cap on each street. When you have a monster it's nice to have enough cash to bet it.

	Full Tilt Poker is licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. © Copyright 2004 - 2005 FullTiltPoker.com., All Rights Reserved